Wednesday, January 03, 2007

It's All About Me and What I Love

Your Dear Leader is still mildly discombobulated (no pun intended) at the counter-revolutionaries who successfully managed to steal yesterday's post. And now Future Leader is sick with a new and improved virus, so there is no telling how far I will be able to get with this post should he suddenly wake up crying like a liberal at Saddam's funeral.

I don't even remember what yesterday's post was about, and that's the deuce of it, as Colonel Beaglehole might say. Had something to do with a comment left by Integralist... What was it... Oh yes, "Bob, what can I say... You put yourself out in cyberspace and seem to only appreciate adulation.... In other words you are a monologue, only taking in what agrees with you, trashing what disagrees with you. What does this sound like? You're a psychologist, you should know: EGO. Or to put it another way, a cult of personality."

Granted, Integralist is right about the cult of personality, but not even wrong about everything else. Once again we are left with the question of how to integrate bunk, especially after it has been debunked. For once bunk has been debunked, there's really nothing left to integrate. For example, since leftism itself has long since been discredited, it had to reinvent itself with new names and concepts such as multiculturalism, moral relativism, tolerance, deconstructionism, income gaps, "two Americas," self esteem, environmentalism, and the like, all enforced by the illegitimate, thought-blocking force of totolerantarian political correctness. Those of us who are beyond a certain age can see that it's the same old impulse, merely under a new guise. Old whines in new battles.

So, I am a "monologue" only taking in "what agrees with me?" To be honest, there was a time that I could say that I was solidly within the integralist camp. I no longer remember when I started writing my book -- it was probably in around '97-98 -- but it is fair to say that it was done so almost entirely from a yogic perspective that the typical new-ager would probably find acceptable. It was only after I had actually pretty much completed the book -- probably in around 2001 -- that I fell (or was he pulled!) into a profound dimension of Christianity that I had never before appreciated, to put it mildly.

Not too long thereafter I submitted the manuscript, but as I grew in understanding, I became increasingly concerned about what I had written. In a previous post I told the story of how I was somewhat miraculously given the opportunity, in a very limited space of time, to completely disassemble and rewrite the book - especially chapter 4 -- to reflect this new understanding. Even now the growth is obviously ongoing, so if I were to have another crack at it, it would be somewhat different. But it doesn't really matter, because I have the blog to correct any errors, to elaborate fine points, and to work out my own understanding -- which I essentially write about as it comes to me in real time.

In short, I am hardly a "closed system." It all depends on what you are open to. No disrespect to Ken Wilber, but to even mention him in the same breath as a Frithjof Schuon, Meister Eckhart, Pseudo-Dionysius, or Gregory of Nyssa, is somewhat preposterous -- not through any fault of Wilber's, but through the person who is incapable of perceiving the heat and light, the substance of grace, that is transmitted in the words of a genuine bearer of metaphysical truth. It is the difference between intellectualism and intellection, the latter of which being much closer to pure vision than thought. But to transmit this pure vision, language must used in such a way that it is "receptive" to these higher things. It is a very mysterious process, but nonetheless "realer than real" to those who are sensitive to it. There is a veritable flood of grace that emanates from the words of the true theologian -- who must be distinguished from the mere theodoxian, that is, someone who talks about the Divine as opposed to being in the Divine.

In my own limited way, I am always at least trying to be open to this dimension of existence. In my book (p. 222) it is symbolized by the downward arrow; I am sure that Wilber himself would agree that his work would represent a horizontal arrow, which is to say, information that can be unambiguously passed from mind to mind, like from his to Integralist's. This is not to put down Integralist. I myself began reading Wilber in the early 1980's and subsequently read every one of his books through Sex, Ecology and Spirituality in 1995.

Now, it is no exaggeration to say that as recently as 1984, when I met the future Mrs. Gagdad -- which had a strangely civilizing effect on me -- I was still half beast. Which is to say, I was a typical man. And yet, despite my lack of spiritual development, there was nothing in Wilber I could not understand. In fact, I took great pride in doing so, for I thought that understanding his theories was equivalent to being highly evolved, and therefore being better than others. Which was the important thing anyway (you are all well familiar with that smug and superior new age attitude of a Deepak Chopra and the like). I wrote a number of papers for various classes that I could easily submit today to any integralist journal or magazine, and I am sure they would be happy to publish them. They would not be able to tell that the man who wrote them -- who happily no longer exists -- was just a half-beast dabbling in spiritualistic ideas, perhaps well-expressed but ultimately devoid of O. Call it the Alan Watts Syndrome, bless his heart (and I'm not being sarcastic -- Watts was a hugely talented and entertaining man who motivated countless less cynical and manipulative people to pursue the real thing).

At the same time, if you had handed me a Bible in 1982, I would have handed it right back to you. No thanks. I'm an evolutionary integralist. I've transcended that primitive mythology. Not only would I have been unable to discern the difference between, say, Schuon and Ram Dass, I wouldn't have understood a word of the former. To be honest, even my first crack at Meditations on the Tarot lasted for about a chapter and a half. I simply wasn't ready for it. And yet, what force is contained in that book for those who are ready!

And how does one become ready? One thing is certain: it is not by becoming an egomaniac. In fact, you don't have to even worry about egomaniacs gaining access to this precious knowledge, for the simple reason that it is inaccesible to the ego. When Jesus says "Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice," Pilate cynically asks the perennial postmodern question, "What is Truth?"

Now, knowing truth is exactly analogous -- for it must be -- to being virtuous. For to be virtuous means to align oneself with virtue. In so doing, we counter the selfish tendencies of the ego. The leftist engages in the absurdity of trying to do good without being good or cultivating goodness in others, for as a modern day Pilate might ask, "What is good? Your culture says this, my culture says that. How dare you judge others?! It's all good, dude." Or as Integralist said the other day, your Dear Leader's approach is "a rather narrow way" of looking at things. Instead, we should be asking, "can the world accommodate the vast diversity of expression that it manifests?... The world was made for everything that it has made." For Dear Leader to think otherwise is "arrogant self-delusion and ego inflation." You see? We must take the fallen world as it is and accommodate ourselves to it, rather than to the living logos that is anterior to it.

If leftists merely aligned themselves with the Good rather than trying to force their manmade version of goodness upon others, we wouldn't even need the left, would we? Empirical studies show that if liberals merely gave as much to charity as conservatives do, there would hardly be the need for a welfare state. In other words, the purpose of the welfare state is to cater to the selfish and egotistical leftists who make one necesssary.

Now, just as to align oneself with virtue is to counteract the ego, so too, to align oneself with truth is to diminish the ego. How could it be otherwise? To paraphrase Schuon, to know Truth is to die a little. And this process of aligning oneself with truth will be a purifying ordeal, as various unredeemed aspects of the self must be "burned out," so to speak -- karmic patterns, mind parasites, anything that is unworthy of cohabiting with the virgin Sophialogo for whom our dear Mysteress is named.

And now, perhaps another personal anecdote to remind you of the boundless compassion of your Dear Leader. Within a few weeks of submitting the final revised manuscript of my book, I was diagnosed with adult onset type I diabetes. Who knows why I burned out my pancreas, but I did. In any event, thereafter I sunk into a depression. I don't think it was because I was depressed over the diagnosis -- which I stoically accepted like a Beaglehole -- but because I was hormonally messed up, probably even mildly ketoacidotic. But with this depression came a renewed concern that I had done something bad with my book. "Have I made a metaphysical boo boo," I wondered? Had I written something unworthy of the Truth I love? I was especially concerned about the humor. Might people take it the wrong way?

The book then came out in early 2005. To be honest, the reason I started this blog in October of 2005 was because it was the only way I could think of to promote the book -- to try to change it from being the commercial catastrophe it was to the mere commercial failure that it is. But I still had no confidence that what I had done was a good thing. Not until I began receiving emails from satisfied customers, like this one that just came in: "Bob, I offer you my sincere gratitude. We are The Few, The Prideless, The Raccoons. Thank you for bringing us together once again in this lifetime. We are getting close to the Telos, the Eschaton, to Revelation, to Awe, to Realization, to Mashiach. And your daily infusion of Spirit propels us ever closer. All the glory belongs to God, who, by His Grace alone, radiates forth from your words."

Now, to suggest that I could somehow take this in the wrong way to exalt me is to thoroughly misunderstand everything I have just written. First of all, it comes as a relief that my writing is not taken in the wrong way. Secondly, it serves as a testimony or confirmation -- the only kind of confirmation that interests me -- that I am performing a useful service for others.

However, I would like to correct a certain misapprehension. The other day, Hoarhey -- Dupree's brash, fence-swinging assistant -- posted a screaming line-drive up the alley, in which he implied that your Dear Leader thanklessly slaves away at his keyboard each morning, getting nothing out of the process while having to tolerate the slings and arrows of malignant leftists and fatuous new agers. In reality, the blog has evolved into something I could not have foreseen at the outset, because it has become a "community of the like-spirited" that stimulates me to no end. At least I hope it doesn't end. Some people believe we are a "community of the closed-minded," which is patently absurd. For the whole point is that everyone who appreciates the blog does so because it helps them maintain contact with a Truth that transcends us.

I look at it in a thoroughly trinitarian way. Duality is the realm of conflict and contradiction, argument and endless debate. Furthermore, merely loving each other in a binary way is ultimately narcissistic. But a true community consists of anytwo who together love a third thing that brings and keeps them together. Therefore, you not only love the other person, but you love what they love. This makes the person all the more lovable, but only when they love what is good, what is true, and what is beautiful -- which also removes the ego from the love and makes it sustainable. So ultimately this is a dynamic community of love -- not of your Dear Leader, but of That which each of us recognizes and loves from afar. But getting closer all the time.

Thank you from the bottom (and the top) of my heart for the service you provide.

HOWEVER, my point was that you do this blog out of a spirit of True charity as a servant without expectation and THAT is the reason you get so much out of it. I was trying to convey that your motivation is selfless, (even if it may not have started out that way).

"I fell (or was pulled!) into a profound dimension of Christianity that I had never before appreciated, to put it mildly."

An intriguing comment, undoubtedly referring to inner or esoteric Christianity. From one of your links:

"The Christian Inner Tradition in the first seven centuries of the Church was very different from Christianity as we know it today."

I stumbled into this through "The Sword of Gnosis" (ca. 1976), Jacob Needleman, ed., a collection of essays by Schuon and fellow thinkers. Excellent book. Following that lead, "Lost Christianity" by Needleman, ca. 1980, another excellent book. Then the Philokalia. The method of scriptural interpretation by the desert fathers of the 4th and 5th centuries found in that collection was quite startling and life-changing.

Exactly. There is a more or less straight line that runs through Origen, Dionysius, and Eckhart, right into the present. Just as the church has "body" -- which is obviousy neccessary and vital to continuity -- it also has a sort of shadow spirit that for me has been a shock and joy to discover.

>>I differentiate between worldview/perspective and gnosis. This is where the "gift" of postmodern is not acknowledged here: that genuine spiritual intuition and even realization can be interpreted in different ways, framed in different worldviews<<

Is there anybody here who doesn't acknowledge that spiritual realization can be and is interpreted in different ways? Each of us clearly interprets spirituality in his or her own specific way.

Inty seems to imply that there is no real impact on one's perspective or worldview when one achieves a degree of spiritual realization, or if there is, it translates as the all-inclusive, big-tent multiculturalism that Inty espouses, the same thin gruel served up by leftists world-wide. We'd then have to conclude that leftists are indeed gnosis-fingered. (right, I know) Inty also states that Bob & co.'s world perspectives are distinct from, have nothing to do with their spiritual realization.

If a genuine gnosis can effect the most profound change in personality, personal behavior, biological function, etc., etc., how could it not have an impact on one's worldview/perspective? And it would have to be a change profoundly at odds with the prevailing, consensus-reality perspective., ie., the leftist, multicultural ethos. One can have a worldview sans gnosis, of course, but I don't believe you can experience gnosis without a corresponding worldview - which, if it is a genuine gnosis that centers on Truth, will of course bear similarities with the worldviews of others who have some degree of awareness of the Truth.

Inty mistakes these similarities of perspective for like-minded *opinions*. Actually, Inty is about nothing but opinion.

Funny thing, Bob. You reminded me of why Blue Man Group has only three main members. The original Blue Men once talked about why they began to feel that three was an important number for them - they said that it seemed to mark the division between isolation and community. Two aren't enough, and four seemed like too many... but three had a symmetry that no other number did.

And dammit - now I have the theme from "Three's Company" stuck in my head.

Yes, even a good gardener will tell you that you never plant two trees together, as it makes it look very static. But three trees planted together always makes the landscape look dynamic. Just walk around your neighborhood and see.

Speaking of "the line", another startling little book in the Dionysian tradition is The Book of Privy Counsel, by the author of the Cloud of Unknowing. Less well known than the latter, it is perhaps more accessible.

The beautiful thing about this kind of community is that although Bob is suffering a mutated virus that's been circulating around his smaller community for the past few weeks, the rest of us can safely continue communing and comismerating with Bob, but not with his virus-pals.

And I'm perfectly content NOT to integrate ANYbody's viruses into my healthy reality!

In fact, the last time I had the flu was after a visit to London, 4 years ago. 9 hours on a return flight with a bunch of pasty-skinned holidayers and their sneezing sniffles, all headed to my sunny state... and I had to breathe in recirculated air with them.

There's a word-picture for Inty: Recirculated bad ideas just don't have any more appeal than recirculated air on a planeful of sick folks. Sorry we couldn't be more accomodating, Inty.

Joan, a United Airlines pilot once told me that the real reason smoking was banned on flights was so that the airlines wouldn't have to spend $$ recirculating the air. Of course, you now have to breathe in the same air exhaled by the influenza-striken guy 20 rows in front of you. Air-egalitarianism!

Also, the pilot told me that the fool-proof way of checking for cracks in a plane's fuselage was by the nicotine stains on the metal. Don't know what method they're using now, if it is similarly effective.

All this talk of threes reminds me of the triadic heart of Shiva in the philosophy of Abhinavagupta.

A few marginal comments Bob. I have seen a number of "traditionalists" fall deeply to egomania, and this in spite of a very deep knowledge of Reality. Schuon writes somewhere that there are two poles to the spirit--discernment and contemplation, and that these should ideally be in balance. It is the case (Schuon often attributed this to what he thought was a recent phenomena due to the devastating influence of the modern world on the soul) that one who tends toward discernment can allow his ego to completely identify with this sole mode of the spirit (it is doubtful that I am formulating this properly), fully ignoring contemplativity--even if meditating endlessly. Another way of saying this might be to understand that Knowledge is not the same thing as discernment, for true Knowledge is to be what one knows. Until that is fully realized, one must be always alert.

Another thing I notice among "traditionalists" (I am in no way putting you or any of your readers in that camp, except by way of comparison) is that they are often opposed to "novelty". You mention this in your book, and it is a remarkable passage that has made me meditate on my own tendencies more than once. I wonder if this is what Integralist feels like he is noticing. I think, in fact, that it is very difficult to understand you without both reading your book and your many postings in your blog. I still have a hard time understanding how you integrate Schuon in your Cosmos, especially when I read your book. In any case, the point I wish to make is that the community, and the ideas it espouses, can and often does become an end unto itself, and in so doing, rejects any novelty that does not arise from its own ranks. You actually write about this far better in your book, but I felt it was worth mentioning in this context.

Besides, trolls never leave they just stop posting.There are trolls from days gone by who are still ranting against Bob on their own blogs. And when the sacred name of Wilber was uttered, even Batman made a reappearance.I mean really, where they gonna go?:)

I thought those kids killed you, and ripped your heart out in the back end of the sewer at the completion of the movie?

Nobody lost anything, we are but a rest stop on Integralist's journey.

You faker.

Do you really think we're that stoopid?

It is not about a left/right war you arachnid. It is about truth.

Leftism is so blantantly opposed to such ideas, that it obviously sloshes to the back end of the sewers of life and insists it is clean. That we should reintegrate waste matter into our systems to be "balanced".

We do not hit the post, and insist we see a ghost here.

God is the one who is hounding Integralist. If he knows this or not, remains to be seen. Do you think God will win? Of course he will. Unless Integralist turns away continually.

However the Hound of Heaven has a way of bringing one's perceptions around to the light.

This is not my doing, or anyone else's but his own.

Try not to be so thinly veiled in stereotypical anti-evangelical viewpoints next time, K?

2. At the sign of confrontation, Integralists just flee; on then, Integralist soldiers, retreat from victory! Our foundations quiver at the shout of truth; brothers, lift your voices, insist till you turn blue.

(Refrain)

3. Like a mighty army we move away from God; brothers, we are treading where Ken Wilbur may have trod. We are all divided, yet integrated are we, one in hope and psychobabble, one in morbidity.

(Refrain)

4.

Millions they may perish, from our tired refrain, but the cry of integration -constant will remain.The light of truth never 'gainst our darkness shall prevail; we have Ken's own promise, and that cannot fail.

A) Receiving counseling sessions from The Oddist Formerly Known As Psychoprincess,

B) Not getting laid, or

C) Just angry that one of the lefties got away without getting saved or shot?

Bob laid down some good bottom soil in today's blog, fairly oozing with fertilizer for understanding, so...

What's with all the the piss and venom, dude? If you're all that enlightened, how about integrating some of it into a more upbeat perspective before sharing your "insights" with the rest of us? Popping off your shiteshooter just to brag about your aim when there's no quarry in sight sounds suspiciously like...noisy prayers.

I'm running out of room on the refrigerator for "Best of Bob" printouts. There's a health benefit though; I find myself standing there re-reading instead of opening the door and grabbing another Sam Adams. I've lost 12 pounds on the Gagdad Diet so far.

Hmmm, so maybe The Gagdad Diet and supplementary Healthy Raccoon series of cookbooks could all be bestsellers to offset the (early) commercial failure* of UCOG. What do fit gagdaddios eat?

The goal of two loving a third thing (in goodness, truth, and beauty) is indeed the third rail of this community. It drives this train through fresh countryside and colorful neighborhoods I wouldn't be likely to visit by myself, but also has the capacity to electrocute those who wander in and stumble across the tracks, ignorant of the invisible power that makes it all work. You gotta get on the train.

It said:"The whole point of this blog is to attract and then convert (not destroy) lefties..."/56666666666666666666666666666666666666+5+*--------------++++++++++++++4444444-*-+*********************************************+

That was Beaky.

She & I were having a beak to nose on my forearm, adjacent to this keyboard. She saw your comment, stepped right on to it & just had to respond:

In English: I'm only 8yrs old, am more clueful than this & I'm a PARROT for God's sake!

Boy, can't you read? God saves, not me. You obviously are the same person, or the same ilk. You actually think that evangelists save people? You think Christians save people?

Ack! Phhhht!! This is elementary, and you've confused it.

Attacking all messengers, you ignore the message.

I'd offer you some coffee with which to wake up your brain, but it is already too late, oh bitter faker.

LIGHTen up a bit and you'll understand.

The venom comes from IT-ish ones, and is so obvious, old, tired, and lame, it is pathetic.

Sometimes, I get a bit tired of hearing such well trodden paths to destruction being lauded as a mysterious revealation, and that from people who when they walk, you can hear the BB rattling around in their skulls.

Oh, always presented to me and others with great emotional aplomb and gifted insightful sarcasm. (An Ego cloak that must work at least for them and perhaps their circle of cohorts) but weak tea nonetheless.

And thats not tea leaves floating in the cup either.

So what you see as Luke's bitterness is my unwillingness to let moronism prevail -as it typically manifests in the bitterness of the original poster -which they love to frost over with various forms of BS -and insist, once again, that we all eat it and enjoy it.

NOT!

I don't have to sit here while the monkeys in the zoo toss their crap through the bars of their bondage at me. Nope, no sir, not at all.

Stop looking at the words, and start looking at the meanings of things.

No More Christian Nice Guy: When Being Nice--Instead of Good--Hurts Men, Women And Children

-Paul Coughlin

(Not saying we should be harsh for the sake of it -this is what an Integralist would do for a stock return volley. But what I am saying is, you don't have to take guff from people either when it pertains to the truth)

Beaky is locally-hatched & of the Congo African Grey type. Clearly she is at the top end of the bell-curve, very insightful & not willing to suffer fools gladly.

Her hatch-date "papers" show Cinco de Mayo on the human calendar, so around here lots of humans celebrate Her Day.

She parties on Beef Stroganoff, which is Her favorite, & is made specially just the way She likes it. Chocolate is toxic to Her, so She makes do with powder-sugar-mini-donuts, which get RIIIPPED apart with great relish, for her "cake".

The Girl is a total Foodie, rejects all things Carrot (flings them across the room, plastering them against the wall-no kidding)& will only eat Bananas one way:cooked in Malto-meal, made with raisins & almonds and garnished with dark brown sugar, a pat of butter & freshly grated nutmeg.This time of year, She gets a splash of low-fat eggnog mixed in, which She loves.

She then stands on my knee next to the bowl, taking cooled spoonfuls, one at a time, until the contents of the bowl have cool enough for Her to dig right in to it.

As you can imagine, I have to wear "protective clothing" as there is lots of beak cleaning going on. What's amusing is when She dives in so far that She gets cereal into Her breathing holes, tries to snort them clear, & we have to play "clean the beak". She's so smart that this was first phrase that She learned.

Welcome to Life As A Parrot Companion. Every word above is Absolutely True.

Last thing he needs is to think he's been sanctified by some commercial. Then he'd just keep sitting in the closet all smug and smarmy the way he does now. And we - okay, *I* - need a sign from him, anything, a wink, a nod, a belch, something. Even a tie selection suggestion would be nice.

LUKE: OMG! HEH!! Bustin A**! Can't stop laffin! "Onward Integralists Soldiers!" Pee & Vinegar is right. Dang time to stand up & confront the Bully on his Bullshit - Wish more people had Spirit & Courage to Confront bullies & call a Wolf a Wolf, to defend Truth, to limit evil & Refuse to Yield Ground to the Enemy in all his guises. Braveheart style: "Time for talkin is ovah."

Don't blame you Luke, not one freakin bit, for not being willing to roll over & take it. Refuse to Acquiesce to take abuse from Aholes who constantly dish it out then have audacity to whine when someone stands against them.

Wolves always deflect Assertiveness, cast it as Aggression becuz they work for the Accuser. Glad you refuse to cave-in to their unhealthy projections & attempted guilt-trip manipulations. No need to "make nice-nice" w/Aholes & Wolves.

Vitrole & Venom is all Wolves have to give. Its a sadsack way to live. They certainly are not worried if they Love God/others well or not. Rebellion stinks & they've quite forgotten their spiritual stench is a dead-giveaway.

*KNEW* he couldn't stay away & would come back - so now he cries cuz you were waiting & ready for his bs?

NAAussie: Don't F*** with a Lion if you don't want to hear them Roar. Or go right ahead...if you don't mind missing a chunk or two from your whiney-wolf behind!

"Don't forget your journey so quickly. You've been where the trolls are. Most likely you've even been there in this lifetime."

Or maybe he hasn't. Perhaps Luke is the rare type of troll that we don't see here very often.

The leftist trolls are trolls because they don't believe in absolute truth. They elevate the relative to the absolute and the immanent to the transcendent.

The leftist troll indulges in a type of hubris that says, since there are no absolutes, I have free reign to impose "relative absolutes" of my own creation.

But there is another type of troll and another type hubris.

It is this type of troll ideology that drives many people to leftism in the first place.

Of course, I am refering to the tradtionalist, the fundamentalist, the classical pre-modern conservative.

This type of troll does not deny the existence of absolute truth. But in his hubris, he pretends to already know absolute in its entirety. He denies the immanent and relative component of existence. And, in bad faith, he attempts to impose his incomplete version of truth on all who cross his path. He thinks he "has it all figured out," when in truth, he is just as clueless as the leftists.

I almost forgot how much I reviled this type of troll. It's been a while since I've seen such a good one.

But enough of this petty ego indulgence that I am speaking out against.

There is no such thing as true religion without community. The sacred community is the necessary theatre wherein true religious responsibilities and activities can take place.Conventional religion tends to create and function as an institutional order, but it, generally, fails to create a practical cooperative order, or true community culture.Merely institutional religion fragments the Inherent Unity (and, thus, the native cooperative community) of Man into a chaotic mass of merely competing individuals.Therefore,conventional religion fails to be True Religion, not only because it fails to Reveal Reality and Truth, but because it also fails to oblige people to create real and true religious community, involving mutual cooperation, mutual responsibility, and mutual dependence.

Anon Said:..."...when in truth he is just as clueless as the Leftists."

Hmmm...I am really MUST choose a "Classical Liberal / Conservative Troll w/Attitude & Smackdown Skills" even if he still be in partial-hypocrit phase or rough around the edges ALWAYS over a Leftie Troll wimpy-whiner passive pharisee in full-on Hypocrit-phase w/greenie-weenieness ANYDAY when choosing Teams for battle, softball, Spiritual defense, blogging, etc. as its my sworn PATRIOTIC Truth-duty.

Trollish behaviors are certainly found here at times even among the so-called Wise: PTSD - Post-Troll-Stress Disorder? Some project too readily & often; others chronically jump to conclusions too quickly before asking questions to find Facts First; both are Trollish behaviors & Spiritually immature; but they are hardly static, either. Due to our love for Truth/God these traits are (hopefully) being submitted / offered up, molded, refined, honed, annealed in Refiners Fire & Spirit. Traits change & grow even slowly - becuz to know the Spiritual Truths we grow to know one MUST shed their ego in layers. You can't maintain Spiritual Vibrancy & Health w/head-knowledge alone or if one indulges ego ALL the time, just as G-BOB wrote of today.

So we can safely say most people here are Not Actual Trolls, not chronic Hypocrits even if they evidence some hypocritical behaviors at times. Such is leftover old-man sin-nature which eventually becomes submitted in Spiritual Growth process. Hence, most of us extend Grace to one another for any trollish weaknesses & temporary insanities that "pop out". But we aren't committed to stay in them like Lefties do. We serve Higher Truth + Spirit, Who has Relationship w/us.

Guarantee: Not One of Us here, even on our Absolute Worst Day, hungover & bleary-eyed from too much blog-reading in 24hrs...can EVER be that bad or approaching TOTAL Cluelessness like the regular Leftist!! Thats an insult & seeks to egalitarianize all here with Lefists - THATs The Mark OF A LEFTIST, indeed.

THATS not a mistake any of *us* would make. Did you honestly mistate it? Or does it reveal sumfink important for us to see? Just asking, am not assuming.

To compare us so blithely to Them is rather Indecent, Traitorly, Projective & Unsporting of you. Suspiciously, you use much Leftie lingo. At least when in error, err on side of Fact, Reality & Truth, not Leftie ideology & dogma.

...To err as a Leftist would err? Sumfink definitely seems to smell & is hiding behind the mask.

- PrincessSpirit -

PS: Leftists & Chronic Abusers deny they abuse & damage others - yet act genuinely shocked to realize people are angry for damaged relationship & the havoc abusers wreak. Denial, lack of empathy for others, irresponsibility all symbolize Spiritual ill-health & dysfunction in those choosing chronic spiritual disease. To heal means to reverse their rebellions with submission of ego/will/choices if they ever hope to gain any spiritual sanity. So too sumfink of us dies the more we grow in Truth/God, relate with Him & trustworthy others in community.

The rest are outside of that, and that is Spiritual Reality. It is not egalitarian, nor does it need to be.

Bob thinks that the "Leftist" pathology is more dangerous and depraved than the "Fundamentalist" pathology on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Apparently you agree.

I, for one, am equally reviled by both the left and right poles of the psycho-spiritual illness we call "hubris." Please see my last comment if you need clarification of these pathologies.

I consider both pathologies to be an equally disgusting form of "trollism."

Have you been to Luke's blog? Frankly, it can only be described as scary and disturbing. That's what happens when you try to elevate a sliver of truth into the whole shebang. Leftists reduce, Fundamentalists articificially elevate.

Don't be fooled just because Fundamentalists and Classical Liberals share a common enemy in Leftists.

I've noticed this since the first day Luke posted over 2 months ago. Has nobody else been able to discern between classical liberal values and fundamentalist totalitarian ones?

Luke, for whatever it might be worth, please don't take this personally. This is not a critique of you as a person. It's merely a discussion of ideological pathologies as I see them manifesting in the persona you make public.

I'm not big on the discussion of the philosophy involved. I am big on smelling something putrifying. I read this blog because I enjoy the challenge. There are those who come on here to provoke. They are taken down in a Darwinian sort of fashion as their skill merits. Those who make it all the way to a Gagdad comment are indeed worthy of respect. Personally I respect Integralist for coming on here and stating his views. He is obviously a seeker of the active kind, curious enough to come out and pit his skill against the beast of his imaginings. It is now up to him to digest his own battle.

You on the other hand are another kind of menace: the rat dog who darts out from beneath the legs of the capable to worry and harry until the experienced among the pride spot an opening.

You mask the same kind of aggression you decry in your perceived enemy. What makes you despicable to me is that you don't acknowledge that aggression. I have lots of aggression toward the status quo on this site. Which is why I shut up most of the time. I recognize truth in much of what is said here, and realize that I am better off examining my own aggression rather than lashing out at what obviously simply pisses me off for reasons I don't always understand. In that reflecting, or sometimes simply owning, is growth. In the lashing out, whether it be sarcastic or wise, is petulant posturing. Ego excercise. Testosterone taunting. Puerile pouting. Lively up yourself, young man, or go away.

Fair warning, Clint Howard: Next time I need to post on your account, it will be as Luke's Mom. And I will swat you off your toadstool again, I assure you. And princess & RC, take note. Silence is golden, unless you have something uplifting to say. Let's leave the heavy dropping to the Host and his alter-egos.

Hoarhey said "...I was trying to convey that your motivation is selfless,"

Let me bare my throat here with a potentially unpopular opinion, not directed at you Hoarhey, but at a pair of words (remember folks, I'm not Jung anymore... not worth eating), but isn't doing something for selfless reasons somewhat of a veiled insult? "Hey there, I did all this swell stuff for you primarily because I knew I would get no value or joy out of having any contact with you, so, anyway, enjoy"

Hopefully the true intent behind it is that your vertical values are more important than your horizontal pleasures, "I was able to lift my head out of my little circle of distracting whims long enough to see that doing something special for you would serve a larger purpose and bring a much deeper sense of value to me as well as you".

It may be just me, but 'selfless' and 'selfish' since I can remember first hearing the words, they always struck me as emphasizing a lack of regard for others and for yourself. Not sure what better replacement words would be, but there it is.

(Don't worry Inty, if they get too vicious and close minded for me to handle, I'll just say it was the fever talking)

Was I in a rage? Maybe you're right. It didn't feel that way at the time. I'm just weary of the surface posturing from the "I'm A Christian, therefore it's Tough Love" crowd, which lately pulls this blog waaay toward ego conflict and awaaay from any realization of the now, which is why I come here. Maybe that's my own issue. Let me practice what I preach, and go away.

Fine words to Luke, and I take them to heart. I apologize, Luke. Time to reflect.

"I'm just weary of the surface posturing from the "I'm A Christian, therefore it's Tough Love" crowd, which lately pulls this blog waaay toward ego conflict and awaaay from any realization of the now, which is why I come here."

No, I agree. That's why I am finally speaking up. I think over the past month or two we've attracted a few fundamentalists who appear to be classical liberals on the surface, until you look a little deeper.

Luke and Ximeze are the ones that readily come to mind, but there have been others. I'm still not sure what to make of the PsychoPrincess.

Frankly, its been ruining my enjoyment of the comments section for some time now.

Will, Joan, Van, Lisa and all the Bob aliases: why haven't you taken control of the commentary?

And again a reminder, these are not eprsonal attacks. Were talking about ideologies and there manifestations in public personas, not about people themselves.

"No More Christian Nice Guy: When Being Nice--Instead of Good--Hurts Men, Women And Children

-Paul Coughlin"

I agree with you. Some of the newer commenters need a good swat. I don't know why Gagdad Bob allows the blog comments to be overrun with the emotional equivalent of what you find on Dailykos or it's ilk.

You have my support, for what it's worth. sign me, "Luke's grandmother."

It said...If it's proper to maintain a purpose of this blog other than what Gagdad has repeatedly stated, then I'd say that the purpose of this blog is not to fold people into a single regimented strategy, view or purpose, but to examine and exchange ideas that have meaning and value to the soul. Naturally if others happen across them and benefit from them, that is a good thing, but to think that we should smother our "I AM" for a "WE ARE" in order to force a "YOU WILL", is a price not worth paying.

Joseph said "...In any case, the point I wish to make is that the community, and the ideas it espouses, can and often does become an end unto itself, and in so doing, rejects any novelty that does not arise from its own ranks...."

Novelty as in a new perspective on truths, or novelty as something new that ought to rankle a few feathers?

The first will always be interesting, the second always rejected - but not because of the novelty itself.

I apologise for the length, and occasional bad grammer, lousy punctuation, etc.

I was amused by people who thought they could hurt my feelings, or I'd take something wrong. It will take more than that, I assure you.

My point: Perhaps that is of yourself more than from Luke.

For those who say they will leave, that is counterproductive and I w ould not recoomend this.

For those who think Luke is a Fundy -nothing could be further from the truth.

As yet, however, finding God in places I've looked, I know, is not common. This causes me to stick to the basics.

And now the greatest point, while considering a point, the great reference point of verticality himself (no not Bob, God) said, "Hold your fire, let me deal with this." -and so, Luke held fire and waited, knowing ensuing discussions would be "more better" for the team.

And y'all thought I don't listen huh? ;)

Van, I suspect Bob grants some free reign a bit, in order to examine the growth and reactions and dynamics. Just like the Lord might do.

Just understand, if some say the "tough love" crowd is offensive, perhaps it is in response to the sugary cotton candy Jesus crowd, who generally as individuals divert themselves from self examination by deciding they are loved.

"Christians Aren't Perfect, Just Forgiven" is a simple example. You can hear the "Nyah Nyah" almost at the end.

I've met more people who are offended by this apparent childishness with which that large group treats real people, who have real problems, than the other way around.

Maybe it is because I've assisted in helping people in recovery groups. People in genuine recovery have a certain clarity and realism about how they see things that "normal" seekers cannot perceive well.

I also was intrigued a bit that in "the room" I was busy being analyzed and taken apart for a time. Whereas, had this been done say for Integralist -having him taken apart and such, this may have been seen as being "cruel" or "mean" etc.

So the distinction between seeing me as an adversary and not something else, creates different rules in people's minds in terms of acceptability about shagging me with a spear.

You see, Luke knows this of people. God just reminded me to standby to let it work itself out here.

There exists a process of integration. But the similarity of the word to Integralism ends there. Please don't confuse the two and let that lead you astray.

The link to scholar.google was given so you could look and read for yourselves and make up your own minds, and hopefully bring back any insights. It was not some kind of sarcastic shot -there is quite a lot on Integralism to be read. (Or just about anything else).

As another said in here tonight, (at least in spirit) "was I angry?" -I was not. I suppose using a play on concepts and using Stephen King's IT as an arachnocomparison seems to have slipped by -and thereby some thought I was being cruel.

"It" asked no questions by and large, but insinuated his definition of the group upon us. This I found to be offensive intellectually.

My points stand. It is not a left / right conflict at all. Moreover it is God which saves -as it is his Holy Spirit which draws. We only play a part.

I assure you Integralist is still trying to, or denying the integration of the things he spoke to Van about, and others. The Hound of Heaven will not so easily give up on him as It has implied by saying "we" "lost" him.

Not an Aussie, we now know, with a sensitivity to "tough love" types, came back with his sword somewhat unsheathed. This posits a bit of fencing.

The point of the book, "No More Christian Nice Guy" is not tough love at all.

The author had an epiphany one day, while not being contented just going to Church and being a Christian.

I'll paraphrase from memory here, "Do we be nice all the time at the eternal expense of others?"

In this I think he is right the answer is no, we do not. And I am sure Princess would point out one needs "balance".

Yet, understand too, I am aware of some things that traditional viewpoints do not recognise. I've mentioned before that Paul used the word "sh*t" in Greek, and in other cases was very harsh, as was Jesus.

I do not use this as an excuse. But suffice it to say, the lovey-dovey-ness viewpoint would not like a Jesus who made a whip and ran people out the front door of the Church, now would they?

What I think is interesting is how far this went, all based upon the idea that Luke was an angry white male, which morphed into Luke being a psychotic and a fundy wack job as bad as a leftist.

I trained to fight Communists. God intercepted me just before I was about to sign abord with some Mercenaries in the late 1970's. I surely would have been dead on some foreign soil, and have killed others.

This was just about the time my mother died of cancer, and I had spent the three or four prior years sleeping on the floors of friends, and sometimes walking around all night, then walking to school in the morning.

Some will immediately say, "Aha! The source of his anger!" but this is not the truth.

The truth is, I sat under a tree at the college one day, being tired of my major and having done everything within that major. I said to myself, "I have nothing to do."

Then, a nearly audible voice said, "Read the Bible."

My brain popped up with excuses to not do so, but I halted this noise and said, "Look, you just said how you have nothing to do, so go get a Bible." I walked across the street to the Mall, and bought a Bible that I still have, one I carried in 2 years of street ministry.

My good friend Steve, knowing my father is a philosophy teacher, suggested Proverbs to me.

I read it handily in an evening, marking things I thought were good.

The following night I decided to be a "good student" and re-read this book. After several minutes I said to myself, "This is not right, this is not Proverbs 5.."

I was reading Psalms.

This may seem like a simple error -however the Hound was busy diverting me about. This type of thing would happen for the next few weeks.

After about a month, the lights went on. I could read between the lines and could hear his voice.

So you see, I am not so certain that if Luke does not "save" someone that it will not occur later on.

There were small handfuls of folks I met later -some right away, and some over the years, who had been praying for me.

Hence Luke does not believe it is as simple as corralling someone into the "sinner's prayer" (which is not in the Bible btw) and grabbing another brownie point by having done so.

More to the point, I have spent long hours of the night on the phone, on the net or in person, talking with people about their problems, issues, and getting the merde off their hearts so they can see clearly the path.

Also to the point, and not often discussed in here, I have been attacked by demons for having done so, and learned some finer points of combat with the unseen.

Thusly, Luke has learned many things of which noone speaks or is not always wanting to know.

To end, one important thing I learned was not when I was a Christian, but it bears noting.

One day my mother and I were having coffee. It was a good day. For those who don't know, cancer can make you feel like today is your day to die, and then back off and you feel hope that you might beat it. It is an insidious thing which messes with your faith and heart.

So I went to the kitchen for a refill. When I returned, she was in tears. At 18, I thought to myself, "Other than the obvious, I wonder whats wrong?"

I knelt next to her on the floor, as she was sobbing and not just crying. I asked what was the matter.

She replied, "I will not get to see my grandchildren." She was a Kindergarten teacher, and absolutely loved kids.

My 18 year old male brain tried to solve this human trigonometry. This aborted quickly as the light dawned upon me. The answer was not "the answer", the answer was that I was there, she was not alone in her grief, even though I could not "fix" it for her.

So this, God has used ever since. The understanding of being there.

"So why are you such a d*ck Luke?"

Often I see the rebellion behind the adversarial position behind the words, and kick at it a bit, to force the real issue to the surface so it can be dealt with.

God set the hook into Integralist, and we are only a part of that. I just hope he does not kill himself trying to take it out.

Lastly, the Firesign Theater quote was great. I forget, is that on "Don't Crush that Dwarf, hand me the Pliers?"

-Luke

PS -Bob, if you do another book, you've got to include Robin's Haiku someplace!

Van,God/Truth centered rather than Self/Ego centered, (as much as is humanly possible)Perhaps I could have chosen better words from the start (the screaming line drive into the gap), please grant me the charity of you amnesty, remember, I'm still Jung. ;)

Anonymous: I never said my name was PsychoPrincess! "Oooops!" on You!!

I am against Spiritual Psychopathy / Pneumapathy of every kind - whether it be Funkamentalist or LeftistLies or anything in between. The Dynamic Balance (Cruxpoint) is what matters to me most. But do not presume that I would trade a Fundy for a Leftie anyday - No Siree. I prefer the Fundys evil to the Lefties alien chaotic insanity. I can work more easily w/a Fundy to get them to "come down" from Radicalism & Rebellion a few notches. Yes, they tend to not "reduce" enuf, whereas Lefties reduce way too quickly (but not reducing in the way we say of "paring down the self.") Fundys internal framework for SOME Truth is already in place in them. Usually they're Fundy becuz they misapply certain principles of Scriptural interpretation & take too much liberty, having either sloppy or overly-legalistic interpretational methods. But basic Truth-framework is still within a Fundy if we agree the Bible is the Truth-base. That can be worked with.

True Lefties & Christian ones may or may not claim to use the Bible as their Truth-base. In the end, they chronically hold self-opinions as their "standard of Truth" (god). They substitute Lie for Truth. They fail to see what they've done, but later purposefully commit spiritual atrocity (Spiritual suicide) for their own diabolical reasons. Either way, they don't serve the Truth they "think" they serve. They take far too much "liberty" with Truth Principles & fail to apply appropriate boundaries.

Lefties usually have none or next to nothing as a viable reliable internal framework of Truth/Principles. Relativism rules & becomes their framework, is "HOW" their corrupt framework is formed, instead of being based on Objective Truth/Principles. Subjectivism Principles rule them instead of Objectivism & Truth Principles. All fashioned from their framework is twisted. Yet they see it not. They are corrupted due to love of self / Subjectivism, hence their ego problems evidence (claiming to have Spiritual enlightenment when they don't even have a relationship w/Spirit, lack of real discernment for Spiritual Truths, etc.)

They either refuse to bend a salvific-knee to Christ or they "get saved" but then stubbornly refuse to surrender & break their ego, refuse to die-to-self on the altar (to repent/submit) to Christ. Either way, they're "skewed" since theres no objectively Centered Cruxpoint Balance for them, only illusions they desperately create & cling to, yet hate us for exposing.

Refusal to choose to break / surrender / submit self to God is a Rebellion both sides share. Hence, they also share the same Antidote.

Lefties cannot be True Integralists given their paradigm. Its flawed from the get-go. It's truly terrifying for them to consider what we are saying is real, really is real - for it means they must give up their entire worldview in favor of one they've been brainwashed to believe is "wrong." The threat of disintegration of the ego gets projected into "annihilation" of the ego, so they dig feet in & refuse even when they understand the logic.

In short, they are afraid. Their whole house of cards philosophies & counterfeit religions are simply a fancy dance built to get distance on the fear they are wrong, or that they are evil, or that they must serve someone greater than self. They are usually very angry about this & instead love to serve self.

So yes, on both sides of the divide, Arrogance Rules Fools & Rebellion is its Enforcer. Submission is not embraced due to the fear it will kill the ego & annihilate it. But the opposite is what actually happens - dying to self gives Liberty to the captive ego so growth can occur.

Maybe it is something like this you are sensitive to & seeing?

In order to grow, we all must die to self. All men must face the horrors (and JOYS!) of self, form a real relationship w/God / Christ / Spirit before we can actually achieve any "spiritual balance." Subjectivism, Narcissism, Relativism & Rebellion make for a complete web of deception and bondage in people. The only ones not in bondage to it of course are the ones who surrender/break, die to self, submit, etc. Call it what you like. You can see this VIRTUE in every single saint, Disciple, Spiritually enlightened person (if they arent a fraud.) And you can also learn to easily see the ones who don't abide in it.

CS Lewis wrote a wonderful essay on "The Poison of Subjectivism" - Find it in: "The Seeing Eye" Collection of Essays.

Lefties often have an "alien" quality to their thinking (as we perceive it) but they are quite unaware of it. SO too do Extreme Rightists (Radicals.) The more Extremists they grow, the more alien & evil their frameworks become. Same is true for Fundys when they are at the extreme; but before they get to that extreme, redemption is still possible & more likely to occur than w/a Leftie.

A Fundy still seeks "Truth" even as self is mixed in; they usually use the SCRIPTURES as common basis of Truth, which allows me to be able to "make sense" w/them (usually.) With a Leftie they have no compunction to use the Bible as their standard of truth - they use Self as the standard, and thereby negate positional identity of Scripture setting own self up as God.

See the differences & why I'd prefer to work with a Fundy more than a Leftie? Their "pathology" and progression of disease/evil are structured quite differently.

I have seen Lukes site & genuinely like his Evidence for Christ post. I dont find anything wrong with it - maybe the wording of the post is whats giving you a problem? Or are you judging simply by the "look" of his site or the stance he adopts?

Apparently Luke likes Apologetics. I can see his interest being here combines well w/Apologetics - Theres a branch of Apologetics called "Transcendent Apologetics." Indeed, CS Lewis was one of the first Transcendent Apologists. So Luke is in good company there.

You might be sniffin out some unsubmitted arrogance perhaps & that may be accurate as some here are more Gnostic than Spiritual; but most are here as they want to learn to transform one to the other, so I give credit if they are here studying & absorbing as Luke is doing, even if they haven't quite "put self down alot" yet as G-BOBs post speaks of necessity of doing if you want to achieve greater Verticality. I call the same quality Submission of the Will/Mind/Heart.

I guarantee if one chooses dying to self as a spiritual discipline it will literally burn the very arrogance right outta yah for quite a while! Been there, done that, still do it. This is why its pretty preposterous (LOL!) for anyone to assert their bunk about "Princess wants to be Queen & rule the World!" Yeah. Right. Sure. I would be least likely of people to do so as I'd much rather serve God, so much so I would be on the alter of self long before I could ever "come to power!" Not much of a Dictator then. But people "miss" sensible logic alot. People who think they "see arrogance" in me usually mistake my Boldness & Assertiveness as Arrogance & Aggression. When I have either I can submit them. If you look carefully I interweave lots of stuff into my communications, so its a tip off that I'm not actually anyone to fear. But people will have triggers; we must give grace where appropriate (With Wolves, we do it as God leads).

Sheep can be frustrating; but Wolves are downright out to devour & destroy.

Instead of jumping to conclusions, we should try to be a bit more "open" (Grace) w/people as we serve same side rather than "embracing ones suspicions" too soon when they've not been tested enuf, so we dont make same mistakes Leftists make.

Submission/dying to self is very powerful & VERY Spiritually Transformative. Its the Crucible where self-sins get heated up, Hammered out, purified, chastened, polished, attached & re-integrated w/God/Spirit. All must go there if they wish to grow Spiritually healthy & keep ones ego under & "balanced." Even Christ chose to submit to God the Father & followed this Principle.

Some may have experienced spiritual abuse at a Church too harsh or fundamental or Leftie for their tastes. Did you mistake assertiveness for aggression with Luke, perhaps?

Submission/Brokenness of self hurts as it cleans out our "mind parasites." Its damned worth it Spiritually considering the fantastic Fruit you get. Again I dont advocate Pietism; No flagellation of self needed! Just healthy dying-to-self. Without it we lose balance, become brittle, hard, way less compassionate

Same Solution of Salvation + Submission of Self (Sanctification) WORKS to produce spiritual growth for both "sides" (Left & Right extremes). It applies to all people. From THAT power & comprehensiveness of its application, you can easily see it IS an Absolute Truth Principle. It works in all situations where its allowed to work & it has done so for 2,000+ years.

It could be you are seeing a lack of empathy & thats whats frightening you? I don't blame you on that point at all. Lack of empathy is barbaric & indicates Narcissism & more. Again, Dying to self brings empathy to ones who have little. I quickly found out when I did a stint working in a Fed-Pen w/serial killers. (Boy was THAT fun fun!) If they learned to repent & have a Spiritual / Higher Power relationship they actually gained a soul & increased their empathic response-ability. Thats unheard of in psych! Ones who refused to die to self of course, gained nothing.

Test & yet also Trust your instincts. Do both. Thats the work of Integralism.

THE PROBLEM: Salvation, without Sanctificational growth, without dying to self, without daily balanced relationship w/God, seems to be The Issue, due to Rebellion & Arrogance limits. Its same issue we all deal w/if we hope to be Integral, some just learn what to do about it faster or sooner than others.

THE KEY: The key is to willingly die to self and stop rebelling so you can live & rise in Christ up the Vertical. He'll not turn away a broken, contrite heart that reaches for Him.

Whereas I think this is a "Christian" blog in the real sense, it is not a Christian blog per se, is certainly not what is thought of as a fundy Christian blog.

As for my part in "controlling", it usually takes a really egregious affront or excess before I squeak up. Inty was certainly an example, there have been a few others in the past. PP, bless her, was in the habit of being way too prolix; I spoke up.

But I have generally kept in mind that however much a shared and sharing community this is, it's not my blog, nor anybody else's save for Robert G. Sure, there are people in here who I feel don't really belong here, who miss the point of the blog while ostensibly aligning themselve with it. I'm not quite the gentleman that Bob is, nor do I have his patience, and were it my blog, I might - might, I say - have let them know they were missing the point of the blog and would be far better off posting in another.

An admission - perhaps one reason why I haven't been too ruffled by the posts of those who I think miss the point of the blog is because I am often in the habit of quickly scanning their posts, and if I see little of substance pertaining to the meaning of the blog, I just move on. You can't be bothered by what you don't really take full notice of.

And again, it's not my blog. Duke Ellington understood that he and his band were one, in a certain sense - each musician played a critical role in the overall presentation. However, the Duke rightly and without hesitation made clear to his band members that he was separate from them, made clear that it was his band/blog, and that if any of them wanted to be the Man, then they could go out and form their own bands/blogs.

I have to respect this ethos. It works pretty well, and in any event, it's just proper. Again, in the face of egregious excess in whatever manner and as I perceive it, I will continue to speak out. Otherwise, I have to keep in mind . . . it's not my blog.

It was once said, "The greatest sin of all, is to be conscious of none."

Likewise, mind parasites. The greatest ones, are the ones we are not aware of.

There were two sin offerings in the old testament. One was the trespass offering.

Trespasses are the things you do, that you know are wrong, but you do them nonetheless.

The other offering was the sin offering, it was for the condition, the fact that you are a sinner.

In the combat against mind parasites, we face the fact, that trespasses are easy to defeat by comparison.

You can be nice, instead of being angry, but still be actually angry.

You can overcome anger, and be nice because God dealt with this with you and within you.

But you cannot defeat the reason for the sin offering so handily.

This is why it is often called a race or a process, that thing called salvation.

Too often we objectify this into the action itself, and not look within to the actual source of the problems.

This is why people argue from a frame of reference they are not aware of much of the time. Or they argue and miss their own presumptive a-priori.

But these things we have been over before.

My blog is dark and evil huh?

The first posting was just to put something there and is trivial.

The second is the historical aspects of the resurrection of Christ, something that has won many to the Lord -those who have a disdain for religious people and Churchianity in general -who have never understood that if you look, God can be found. It is also useful, I've found for Christians who came in the door on an emotional conversion, but have no teaching of the facts invovled behind the faith.

The most recent perhaps grinds the hardest. I put up the video of Saddam's hanging. The news media kept insisting it was too horrible to see, and thereby censored it.

I put it there, as I am more than familiar with his death dealing activities, and am tired of the media not giving up the whole story.

Like other blogs, it will fade with time into the morass of what I might post. Or I might delete it.

I am Luke BlogWALKER and will not be here forever. As Luke knows this is a journey, and not some stopping point with which to be heard.

The photo I posted of the Invisible man comes from a play of the famous movie. I liked the photo. I used to have one up of the Very Large Array Radio Telescope, of which I was blessed enough to have worked on a bit in College.

It is too bad someone decided to read nefariousness into the whole thing.

I've seen this happen before when I post about the historical proof. Or other things which are verifiable, rather than things which are emotional.

I will say this. Anyone whose posts mostly revolve about what they have personally experienced or are experiencing or felt or are currently feeling - by definition, you are missing the point of this blog, and yes, you would be better off posting elsewhere.

Yes WILL, you're right but its late and I'm very tired. :D Tomorrows another day & will try again. Thanks for heads-up on MSWord idea will do.

Would like to point out: The myriad troubles Inty caused needed to be faced & addressed much sooner to contain the damage. He posted as other people repeatedly (I'm all for aliases when they are funny but not when they are chronically abused as he did), maliciously hacked my nic & password in order to post as me in blue, made overt sexual assertions, attacked others unnecessarily, manipulated and sought to draw people one against the other, etc. all while not learning much of anything. Early on I said he wanted attention, not to learn what we "meant."

This kind of chronic immature juvenile behavior that violates others without regard for others being & security is a serious issue from anyone posting here. It should not be poo-pooed & ignored or allowed to continue w/o firm correction. Inty often engaged purposefully w/malicious & counterfeit intents. Was anything said or done to deter him from doing it more? What will deter others?

Was disappointed to see his antics were not dealt w/directly nor addressed. Nor was he "called" on them to cease & desist even after he hacked my nic. I'm a big girl & handled it myself. But he should have been called down for that violation. He repeatedly tried to alternately draw & then attack people here needlessly, to pit one against the other - what came of all the chaos?

None of us here are responsible to "save Inty" or any Leftie from himself. I do not feel sorry for him. Why should we have to put up with the chaos & abuse? Some "abuse," ok. The overly-malicious kind should be nipped in the bud. To not do so firmly invites other (Lefties) to come here & stir up unnecessary troubles as well with nothing to deter them. I simply request it be considered & a plan for containment made so it can be dealt w/sooner next time it occurs (and it will.) Then blogging can still be fun, secure & appropriate for everyone when balance is maintained better.

Some good stuff today from Anonymous and Aussie/No Longer Green. I only skimmed the thread, but I guess I couldn't keep away...I must be begging for Conversion, as I think IT implied.

Will, I'd like to talk more with you because you bring up a very interesting topic and some good points, but suffice it to say you clearly misunderstand (and misrepresent) my viewpoint, doing what Bob et al did: equating it with "Leftism" because it doesn't fit into your own brand of what I'm now realizing is an offshoot of Traditionalism. I will take at least partial responsibility (for the misunderstanding) based on seemingly inadequate presentation.

But yes, I agree that genuine gnosis will impact worldview. But it will not necessarily change the "basic operating system," so to speak. It may merely re-inforce it.

I generally agree with Wilber's take, where he differentiates stages/structures of consciousness with states of consciousness. If one experiences a transpersonal or spiritual state of consciousness they will translate it "down" into their stage/structure of consciousness.

If we take the basic Gebserian STAGES, we have:

archaic magicalmythicrationalpluralisticintegral

If one at the mythic stage of development has a spiritual experience they will interpret it ethnocentrically, via their own cultural symbology. They will even see and experience it thusly. They will not be able to differentiate their own cultural (and relative) forms for the deeper, transpersonal realities. They may even think, for example, that only Christians experience Christ! ;)

Will they be transformed by their experience? Perhaps, but not in terms of stage development. That is, a spiritual experience will not evolve them to the rational stage (and the stages do unfold sequentially). It may bring them a deeper sense of well-being, peace, and even spiritual understanding, but stage-development requires something other than peak spiritual experiences, which is related more to Grace and surrender. It requires immense self-effort.

Anon said, "Will, Joan, Van, Lisa and all the Bob aliases: why haven't you taken control of the commentary?"

Can't speak for the others. Me personally, I have a life. And a job. Two jobs, actually. The little I post on here is to amuse myself and let the Cosmos know that I exist. (Yes, I need the attention from time to time!)

My journey is a bit quieter than most, and keeping quiet is the best response to the idiocy. The idiots will get bored and leave (except for Nags) or will hang around and obsess forever. The rest of us know who we are, know who's posing, etc.

And our favorite psychotic is no longer posting under her blog i.d., so it's either her or not her so we all just click and close and go on having a real life.

Will, being a gentleman and a scholar, keeps trying, bless his heart. I gave 4 decades of my life to patient reasoning with fools. I'm here to have a discussion among like-minded friends. The ankle-biters fail to amuse any more.

Just so it is clear, the "screaming line drive into the gap" was a compliment. I love seeing that swing of yours. The quickness, the timing, the level bat head, the powerful wrist action, the eye-backhand coordination. Sweet.

Hoarhey,Seriously, wasn't you, just reminded me of those two words... they've bugged me as seeming not quite what they seem, since I was kid.BTW, you never told me which direction I should bow towards - I REALLY like those line drives too.

I'm curious where Bob weighs in here: Bob, in your own grand scheme, does this blog best serve its purpose when ideas are batted about by a few pundits and sages who agree with you and your talking points? Or does it work best when the less lofty chime in rather than remaining on the sidelines?

After months of observing, it seems to me that the blog comments section is weighted heavily toward the intellectual elite. Those who don't possess a ready philo/psycho/religiosophical framework generally are berated just for asking a question. Whether or not they might agree with the position once they understand it. And too often in the attempt at understanding, someone slings some dung, and the inevitable sophomoric name-calling ensues. Very tiring. Not very enlightening. However it does wonders for identifying the possible psychoses latent in the commenters.

I am most engaged spiritually when I take part. Surpise, surprise. Yet I don't feel welcome here, for the reason mentioned above. Yet in my own dialogue with God, I still feel worthy even if I'm not smart enough for the OneCosmos regulars. And there, I suppose, is my real question:

Is this in keeping with your own notion of the Grand Scheme, the One Cosmos, that those not "smart" enough just...well, aren't smart enough to move up vertically? Does spiritual advancement, after all, really depend on one's IQ?

The rabid mongrel Integralist is back for more lashings? A true glutton for punishment. Arent we lucky.

Collapse his posts he talks trash. P2s posts convey substantive material I get insight from them. Integralist tells nothing new. He beats the same dead horse as the UnMan in Perelandra does to Ransom. "Ransom. Ransom." "What?" "Nothing" "Ransom. Ransom. Ransom..." Hes clearly an addict or a psycho. Get new material and become a real boy, Pinocchio.

Takes wisdom to see wisdom. Shes longwinded but no fool, is dead on in what he could do to gain wisdom. Donkeys aren't interested in wisdom. Those not owning their spiritual filth are burdensome to others. I know as I've been a spiritual burden to others but changed by God's and my own hard work. I don't respect anyone who doesn't help himself. We would not suffer Integralists immature deflective repetitious rants if he would but grow. She isnt posting to him any longer which shows restraint. He needs to show restraint instead of continuing to be a fool and donkey. Get on with business at hand, ignore his braying. Put the bit and bridle to mouth or the animal runs wild.

Only fool I see here is the one who has y'all running in circles around him like the Joker from Batman. Thank only yourselves if no one handles him wisely. Many expect better from a blog about spirituality. Less personal attacks amongst yourselves and more posts on the subject at hand is needed. Mature community is better than a foolish helpless one.

I just wanted to say that I make stupid comments all the time and most tolerate me or ignore me. When I do have a question though, I don't start off by insulting others. Plus many questions have already been asked and answered in a previous post, do a little research first. Some comments do go to extremes in self-rightousness and Bible quotes but I look at it as part of my own lesson on tolerance. Perhaps you are projecting some of your own insecurities about yourself, Not an Aus. No offense taken in your asking and hopefully none will be received in the answer! ;0)

Plus, many commenters need to lighten up and enjoy life and breathe! Bob does have a beautiful and unique way with words and ideas, that we can easily agree on or why waste the time reading...

Along with Joan's Haiku, perhaps a separate collection of "What Bob intended this blog to be" posts would be of interest.

Seems to me, most then insert what they came here for, or what they thought it was for.. something like that.

It occurs to me, that mind parasites can be compared to faith in a way.

That is to say, for example, as in having faith in faith, rather than faith in God, one can place faith in the mysterious -seeking mystery rather than seeing mystery can be not only a precursor, but a result of the process.

This would be a mind parasite -the leading the search with a preoccupation / definition for mysteriousness.

Proportionally, a mind parasite (perhaps a subtle one) can be a belief in a concept or notion that is a leading factor in determining the truth -but is in fact, filtering your ability to do so.

(See previous articles of Bob regarding a-priori and all that)

And now, the Evil, Angry, Darkman, Luke is going to finish his breakfast while reading today's posting.

This is a really tiresome comment especially from someone who claims to have read Posts/Comments for an extended period.

Many, newcomers ask questions or make comments which longtimers see to be in error, and are given reasoned, even supportive replies to. That was my initial experience here, NoMo can probably give a nod here as well.

It isn't error that brings out the rebuff's, it's attitudes that are patronizing, condescending, holier-than thou, know-it-allish and/or down right insulting which tend to get the treatment.

Van,I was attempting to use the word "novelty", which, in fact, is a word I never would have used 6 months ago, in the way Bob does in his book, which, I would say refers to truths, but not necessarily the kind that one immediately recognizes.My initial discovery and interest in Bob's blog had to do with his approving and revering F. Schuon. Meanwhile, I began scratching my brutelike head as to how Bob is a devoted evolutionist, albeit of the God-believing kind, and still a Schuon approver. Evolution has never, ever, until Bob and his book, been a doctrine I could accept. As Schuon would say, it is a metaphysical impossibility. And, of course, he is quite right, unless, and this is a big UNLESS, you accept some of the assumptions that Bob outlines in his book. If you understand Schuon, then he is right. If you understand Bob, then he is right. Now, there is simply no way that Schuon, or his followers, would ever accept this "novelty" of evolution, as described by Bob. There are several other Bob doctrines that are similar "novelties" to a Schuonian.

Joseph,I'm still shallow in my Schoun end, so... since it doesn't seem that either of us meant to use novelty in the horrid, foul and nasty way I was concerned about... how about I match your brutelike head with my brutelike head on this one and we call it even ?

;-)

(PS - wish you'd comment more, I always get something out of our dissagreements, even if it is just me scratching my brutelike head!)

What About Bob?

Who spirals down the celestial firepole on wings of slack, seizes the wheel of the cosmic bus, and embarks upin a bewilderness adventure of higher nondoodling? Who, haloed be his gnome, loiters on the threshold of the transdimensional doorway, looking for handouts from Petey? Who, with his doppelgägster and testy snideprick, Cousin Dupree, wields the pliers and blowtorch of fine insultainment for the ridicure of assouls? Who is the gentleman loaffeur who yoinks the sword from the stoned philosopher and shoves it in the breadbasket of metaphysical ignorance and tenure? Whose New Testavus for the Restavus blows the locked doors of the empyrean off their rusty old hinges and sheds a beam of intense darkness on the world enigma? Who is the Biggest Fakir of the Vertical Church of God Knows What, channeling the roaring torrent of 〇 into the feeble stream of cyberspace? Who is the masked pandit who lobs the first water balloon out the motel window at the annual Raccoon convention? Who is your nonlocal partner in disorganized crimethink? Shut your mouth! But I'm talkin' about bʘb! Then we can dig it!